September 2008 - ispcp - lists.icann.org

Re: [ispcp] Draft statement on gNSO reform implementation issues
by Greg Ruth Sept. 16, 2008

Sept. 16, 2008

Looks fine to me. There seems to be a typo in the first paragraph of section 2 "for an interim period one NCA appointee would made to each house" Greg ----- Original Message ---- From: Mark McFadden <mcfadden(a)ispcp.info> To: ispcp(a)icann.org Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 10:48:55 AM Subject: [ispcp] Draft statement on gNSO reform implementation issues Based on the last ISPCP teleconference, a draft ISPCP statement on gNSO reform implementation issues has been produced. It is attached to this mail message. We need to have comments pretty quickly because the deadline for submitting these comments is almost upon us. Please “reply-all” any comments you might have on this short draft. Thanks for your prompt attention! Mark Mark McFadden Secretariat, ISPCP

1 0

Draft statement on gNSO reform implementation issues
by Mark McFadden Sept. 16, 2008

Sept. 16, 2008

Based on the last ISPCP teleconference, a draft ISPCP statement on gNSO reform implementation issues has been produced. It is attached to this mail message. We need to have comments pretty quickly because the deadline for submitting these comments is almost upon us. Please "reply-all" any comments you might have on this short draft. Thanks for your prompt attention! Mark Mark McFadden Secretariat, ISPCP

1 0

Comments of the ISPCP Constituency on the ALAC Review
by mark.h.mcfadden＠bt.com Sept. 12, 2008

Sept. 12, 2008

ISPCP Comments to the ALAC Review In the main, the ISPCP constituency believes that the At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) can serve a useful and important role in ICANN to "consider and provide advice on the activities of ICANN, insofar as they relate to the interests of individual Internet users." [from the Bylaws] We believe that, although the ALAC initially had an ineffectual beginning, it has seen significant improvement in the past year. Nevertheless, it has a long way to go before it can truly be said to represent the interests of the general Internet user community. Therefore, the ISPCP constituency welcomes the ALAC Review as a valuable starting point for strengthening the ALAC and improving its efficacy. Toward that end we offer the following comments to the main recommendations of the BCG report. 1.1 Recommendations Recommendation 1 That the number of NomCom appointees to the ALAC should be increased from five to seven, and that this structure should specifically be revisited at the next triennial review taking account of the then existing Geographic Regional Structure of ICANN. We see no reason to change the number of appointees to the ALAC. This would run counter to the concept of ALAC representing the 5 ICANN regions. Each region has its own particular interests and concerns; population is not an overriding factor. Recommendation 2 That all members of the ALAC (and, ideally, of the RALOs) should be given clear position descriptions. We fully support this recommendation. Recommendation 3 That the current distribution of the RALOs be left unaltered until at least the next ALAC review. This a reasonable approach. The implementation of the RALO concept is still in its early days. It should be more mature before considering an alteration of its structure. Recommendation 4 That ICANN should implement an activity-based costing system in order to improve resource management. We fully endorse this recommendation. This is indispensable to improving ALAC's effectiveness. Recommendation 5 That ICANN should provide further resourcing to support the ALAC, to the extent of (up to) one new employee per region. We agree that ICANN should provide further resourcing if, as and when necessary to support the ALAC. The amount and type of support should be based on the Annual Statement of Intent and ALAC Strategic Plan (see Rec. 10). Until a clear and persuasive case is made, though, it is premature to suggest increased support. Recommendation 6 That the ALAC Chair negotiate an annual support agreement with ICANN staff, setting out agreed expectations and performance indicators. Agreed. Recommendation 7 The ALAC position on the Board should remain that of a Liaison, with rights to full participation and information, but no voting rights. Agreed. This is an effective and appropriate way for ALAC to contribute to the deliberations of the ICANN Board. Recommendation 8 That the term of appointment of the Board and other Liaisons be extended to two years, subject to the ALAC retaining the 'right of recall' under the Rules of Procedure, Rule 11 - Recall Votes. Acceptable. This is a reasonable modification of the current arrangement. Recommendation 9 That ICANN staff should create a brief and multi-lingual guide to ICANN and the ALAC, aimed at individual Internet users and ALSs. We fully support this. Recommendation 10 That the ALAC should develop: * A simple annual Statement of Intent which specifies the current issues and priorities, objectives and activities for the next 12 months, and defines measures of success for each of the activities and objectives. This document should be strongly aligned to ICANN's Strategic and Operational Plans and be published on the ALAC website; * Before the next ICANN annual planning cycle, the ALAC should develop a Strategic Plan of its own (complementing the broader ICANN Strategic Plan). * Following the development of this Strategic Plan, the ALAC should then generate an annual Operating Plan which cites the activities and resources required to support the Strategic Plan during that year (also complementing the corresponding broader ICANN Strategic and Operating Plans and fitting the same planning cycle). We believe these documents are necessary to improve the focus and effectiveness of the ALAC. Considerable emphasis should be place on outreach activities; today ALAC engages an unacceptably miniscule fraction of the billion+ Internet users. If regional focus is expanded, additional staff support should be implemented step by step as warranted (see comments on Rec. 5). Recommendation 11 That the term of appointment of the ALAC Chair should be extended to two years. This is an acceptable modification of the current arrangement. As with Rec. 8, we believe the 'right of recall' under the Rules of Procedure, Rule 11 - Recall Votes should be retained. Recommendation 12 That the ALAC should explore ways to differentiate between organizations that genuinely represent individual Internet users, and are therefore ALS candidates, as opposed to those which may be a better fit with the NCUC. We fully support this. Additionally we recommend that both ALAC and NCUC should be urged to clarify the status of representation. Recommendation 13 That the ALAC should publish on its website trends in the average time taken from receipt of an ALS application to decision. Supported. Recommendation 14 That regular ALS compliance reviews be conducted and the non-compliance provisions be applied as appropriate. Supported. Recommendation 15 That ICANN should develop clear sanctions for non-compliance. These might include: ineligibility for ICANN travel funding; loss of voting rights; or being suspended until the matter is remedied. Supported. Recommendation 16 That any outstanding issues relating to Ombudsman reports 05-1090 and 06-317, should be dealt with as soon as possible by the ICANN Board or the ALAC (as appropriate). Supported. Recommendation 17 That the ALAC should develop a clearly defined process for the engagement of the At-Large community in developing policy positions. We fully support this. A uniform process and increased outreach are called for. Recommendation 18 That the ALAC should use multi-lingual wikis rather than the current email lists to allow the At-Large community to more easily observe and participate in the development of policy positions. Agreed. Recommendation 19 That ICANN should increase the public comment period to 45 calendar days in order to allow a greater time period for At-Large community consultation in all regions. This should not be necessary if ALAC succeeds in improving its effectiveness in reaching its target community. 45 days is unacceptably long. Recommendation 20 That the ICANN Board should amend the Travel Policy to pay for accommodation expenses (including breakfast and internet access fees) and where practicable accommodate At-large members at or very near the main conference venue. The per diem amount (to cover other appropriate daily expenses) should also be available as a cash advance for those that require it. No special provisions should be formulated for ALAC participation in ICANN. Any ALAC travel policy should be discussed and developed in the context of the general ICANN travel policy and subject to the same financial reviews. Recommendation 21 That private email lists should be used only for appropriate non-public discussion. Agreed. Recommendation 22 That ICANN should continue to work on its language policy, including translation and other services. Generally supported, but ICANN should determine the impact on its financial budget implications and transparently make their findings known to the public. Recommendation 23 That ICANN staff should manage and maintain content of the various ALAC wikis. As with Rec. 22 we generally support this concept, but with the proviso that the specific budget implications are calculated and made transparent. Recommendation 24 That the ALAC should replace email lists with wikis for policy discussions in particular and continue the evaluation of Web-based tools to facilitate discussion and collaborative working. Agreed. This should help improve ALAC's effectiveness.

1 0

FW: [council] Action Items from GNSO Council meeting 4 September 2008
by tony.ar.holmes＠bt.com Sept. 8, 2008

Sept. 8, 2008

All Please see items and links below, noting the opportunity to send constituency comments on: (i) WHOIS Hypotheses Study Report (ii) ICANN Geographic Regions (iii) ALAC Review Could I ask that you post comments to the list on (i) and (ii) by 20 September and (iii) by 11th September. Please cc the ISPCP secretariat when making comments, so that we can be sure of collating all input. Regards Tony -----Original Message----- From: owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Glen de Saint Géry Sent: 04 September 2008 22:29 To: council(a)gnso.icann.org Subject: [council] Action Items from GNSO Council meeting 4 September 2008 Dear Councilors, Please note the immediate action items that arose from the Council meeting today, Thursday 4 September 2008. 1. Councilors should forward WHOIS Hypotheses Study Group report to their respective constituencies ASAP for discussion and comment as applicable in preparation for preliminary discussion in the Council meeting on 25 September 2008 http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois/whois-study-hypothesis-group-report-to-c… 2. Council representatives are asked to forward the recommendations of the ICANN Geographic Regions report http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/icann-geographic-regions-26aug08.pdf to their respective constituencies for discussion and comment as applicable and be prepared to finalize the GNSO comments in the Council meeting on 25 September 2008. 3. Comments are invited on the ALAC Review which comment period closes on 12 September 2008. http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/#alac-rev-jul08 Thank you. Kind regards, Glen Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

Board Resolution on Council restructuring, FYI
by Mark McFadden Sept. 5, 2008

Sept. 5, 2008

ICANN's Board approved the following resolution at its 28 August meeting by a vote of 13-0: Whereas, on 26 June 2008, the ICANN Board endorsed the set of "GNSO Improvements" submitted by the Board Governance Committee's GNSO Review Working Group (BGC-WG), with the exception of the BGC-WG's recommendation on GNSO Council restructuring. Whereas, in postponing its decision on Council structure, the Board asked the GNSO to convene a small working group to "Submit a consensus recommendation on Council restructuring by no later than 25 July 2008 for consideration by the ICANN Board ..." (see ICANN Board Resolution 2008.06.26.13). Whereas, that Working Group on GNSO Council Restructuring (WG-GCR) submitted a report to the Board in late July detailing areas of consensus that it achieved during its month-long deliberations. Whereas, the Board discussed the WG-GCR report at its 31 July meeting and directed the ICANN Staff to thoroughly review the report and share its recommendations with the Board prior to the 28 August Board meeting. Whereas, the Board will endeavor to work through the remaining issues during the next Board meeting. Resolved, on balance, the WG-GCR report addresses many challenges facing the community in a way that is consistent with the overarching goals of the GNSO Improvements package and the BGC GNSO Review WG that developed it. Resolved, the Board endorses the direction of the WG-GCR report and supports the bicameral voting structure of the new Council. The Board supports the establishment of one house (described as the "contracted party house" in the report) and directs that this house initially will have 3 representatives from each stakeholder group -- Registrars and Registries -- plus 1 voting NCA (Nominating Committee appointee). The second house (described in the report as the "non-contracted party" house) will be composed of 6 representatives from each stakeholder group -- Commercial and Non-commercial -- plus 1 voting NCA. Resolved, as noted, the Board accepts the WG-GCR proposal to seat one voting NCA representative in each of the two houses. The Board also directs that a third "independent" NCA representative continue to serve on the Council. Resolved, the Board directs the GNSO Council to work with ICANN Staff on an implementation plan for Board approval that creates a transition to this new structure by the beginning of calendar year 2009. The Board requests that existing constituencies confirm their status with the Board during the intervening time period, and requires constituencies to formally confirm their status every 3 years to ensure that they continue to meet the requirements of Article X, Section 5, subsection 3 of the ICANN Bylaws. This will be an opportunity for existing constituencies to demonstrate compliance with the principles of representativeness, openness, transparency and fairness set forth in the ICANN Bylaws. The Board also encourages new constituencies to submit requests for certification, especially during this transition period. Resolved, the Board appreciates the significant amount of work performed by the WG-GCR and extends its sincere appreciation to working group members Avri Doria, Chuck Gomes, Alan Greenberg, Tony Holmes, Bertrand de La Chapelle, Steve Metalitz, Milton Mueller, Jonathon Nevett, and Philip Sheppard for their efforts on this matter.

1 0

Re: [ispcp] SECRETARIAT: Call for NomCom Election by Acclamation - Nomination Period Closed
by Greg Ruth Sept. 3, 2008

Sept. 3, 2008

Thanky you all! From Denali National Park (Alaska), Greg ----- Original Message ---- From: Mark McFadden <mcfadden(a)ispcp.info> To: ANTONIO TAVARES .COM <atavares(a)dialdata.com.br>; ispcp(a)icann.org; knobenw(a)telekom.de Sent: Tuesday, September 2, 2008 4:18:43 AM Subject: RE: [ispcp] SECRETARIAT: Call for NomCom Election by Acclamation - Nomination Period Closed Speaking personally and not as Secretariat: I completely agree with Antonio and thank Greg for his work in this year’s NomCom. Mark McFadden From:ANTONIO TAVARES .COM [mailto:atavares@dialdata.com.br] Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 7:15 AM To: mcfadden(a)ispcp.info; ispcp(a)icann.org; knobenw(a)telekom.de Subject: RE: [ispcp] SECRETARIAT: Call for NomCom Election by Acclamation - Nomination Period Closed I totally agree with the acclamation of Greg Ruth as ISPCP representation at the ICANN´s Nominating Committee, and wish all the best for Greg on his tough mission ahead. Antonio Tavares

1 0

SECRETARIAT: Applications to Join the ISPCP Constituency (ARISPA)
by Mark McFadden Sept. 3, 2008

Sept. 3, 2008

======================================================================== Internet Service Provider and Connectivity Provider Constituency Generic Names Supporting Organization ======================================================================== 2 September 2008 APPLICATION TO JOIN THE ISPCP CONSTITUENCY The Secretariat is pleased to announce that the Arab Regional ISP Association has applied to join the ISPCP Constituency. In accordance with both the ICANN bylaws and the ISPCP bylaws I am requesting that all members of the constituency consider the application and, if there is any objection, post the objection to the ISPCP mailing list. Objections should be raised on our mailing list. If no objections are raised by Friday, 5 September 2008 at 2200 GMT I will welcome ARISPA to the ISPCP constituency and make all necessary administrative arrangements. If you have questions relating to the process by which new members are elected to the constituency or the constituency Articles please contact the ISPCP Secretariat at: mcfadden(a)ispcp.info ======================================================================== BEGIN APPLICATION ======================================================================== NAME OF THE ORGANIZATION SEEKING ISPCP MEMBERSHIP: Arab Regional ISP's Association "ARISPA" PRINCIPAL CONTACT NAME: Mohamad Feras Bakour / Chairman PRINCIPAL CONTACT PHONE: [ withheld for privacy ] PRINCIPAL CONTACT EMAIL ADDRESS: b-feras(a)scs-net.org ORGANIZATION DESCRIPTION: The Arab Regional ISPs Association "ARISPA" is a non-governmental, none for profit organization, set up by a group of Arab companies operating in the internet and telecommunications sector, and recently became one of the specialized Unions that are working under the umbrella of the Arab Economy Counsel at the League of Arab States. In general, the Union aims to develop and coordinate its members activities in the fields of Internet & telecommunications and to consolidate the bonds among them in order to achieve the Economic integration among Arab countries. IS YOUR ORGANIZATION OR ITS MEMBERS PRIMARILY INVOLVED WITH THE PROVISION OF CONNECTIVITY OR ACCESS TO THE PUBLIC INTERNET? [ YES/ NO ] Yes WHAT IS THE REASON YOUR ORGANIZATION WISHES TO JOIN THE ISPCP? As our organization is committed to support the Arab Internet and Telecom providers, so one of its main goals is to cooperate and coordinate with the constitutions that are working and supporting this sector In the world, which will keep us updated with the recent steps that are taken In this field, on the other hand it is Important to participate In giving our opinions about the related Issues that will be discussed and applied by the ICANN. UPON JOINING THE ISPCP ARE THERE OTHER EMAIL ADDRESSES (BESIDES THE PRINCIPAL CONTACT) THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ON THE ISPCP MAILING LIST? (PLEASE LIST EMAIL ADDRESSES AND NAMES) info(a)arispa.org WEB URL FOR YOUR ORGANIZATION? www.arispa.org IS THERE ANY OTHER INFORMATION YOU WOULD LIKE TO SUPPLY FOR CONSIDERATION BY EXISTING ISPCP MEMBERS? [ none provided ] ======================================================================== END APPLICATION ========================================================================

1 0

SECRETARIAT: Call for NomCom Election by Acclamation - Nomination Period Closed
by Mark McFadden Sept. 2, 2008

Sept. 2, 2008

======================================================================== Internet Service Provider and Connectivity Provider Constituency Generic Names Supporting Organization ======================================================================== 2 September 2008 NOMINATION PERIOD CLOSED - ICANN NomCom 2009 Representative In accordance with both the ICANN bylaws and the ISPCP bylaws I am closing the period for nominations for an ISPCP representative to ICANN's Nominating Committee. With the adoption of the most recent ICANN By-laws, the ISPCP is required to elect one member to the ICANN NomCom. During the nomination period, the constituency nominated a single person. Greg Ruth (US) of Verizon In accordance with past practice in the constituency, when the number of seats to be filled for a ICANN vacancy is the same as the number of nominations we propose that the selection be done by unanimous acclamation. As Secretariat, I propose that we elect Greg Ruth by acclamation to the ICANN Nominations Committee for 2009. Objections should be raised on our mailing list. If no objections are raised by Friday, 5 September 2008 at 2200 GMT I will inform ICANN staff of the constituency's choice. If you have questions relating to the election, the constituency Articles or the nomination process please contact the ISPCP Secretariat at: mcfadden(a)ispcp.info

2 2